Earnest Woods, II v. Tom Carey

MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Earnest Cassell Woods, II, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing for failure to exhaust his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging retaliation and other claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Sapp v. Kimbrell, 623 F.3d 813, 821 (9th Cir.2010), and we affirm.

The district court properly concluded that Woods failed to exhaust his administrative remedies because Woods failed to alert prison officials to the nature of the wrong underlying his retaliation claims, exhaust his grievances to the final level of review before filing his complaint, or establish that he should be excused from the exhaustion requirement. See Rhodes v. Robinson, 621 F.3d 1002, 1005-07 (9th Cir.2010) (plaintiff must exhaust before filing the complaint, not during course of litigation); Nunez v. Duncan, 591 F.3d 1217, 1224, 1226 (9th Cir.2010) (where defendant establishes failure to exhaust, burden shifts to plaintiff to prove that administrative remedies were unavailable to him); Griffin v. Arpaio, 557 F.3d 1117, 1120 (9th Cir.2009) (grievance must include facts underlying inmate’s claim as to alert the prison to the nature…